--- In firstname.lastname@example.org
, William Pietri <william@...>
> aacockburn wrote:
> > I'm happy he wrote it and I agree with pretty much everything he
> > wrote except, "Agile's biggest threat to system quality stems
> > the fact that it's a method proposed by programmers" [...]
> > If UX designers decide that BECAUSE it was suggested by
> > that it's bad for them, then the UX designers are the biggest
> > threat themselves.
> Maybe threat is the wrong word, but I think he has a point.
> I'm a programmer, and I agree that's at least a big risk. I don't
> that it's the biggest one, but from the perspective of somebody who
> spends most of his time on consumer-facing software, I think Agile
> methods as written have a a big gap. I don't think this was
> it's just a continuation of the prevalent software development
> My understanding is that none of the Agile Manifesto signers was a
> experience designer, user researcher, or interaction designer, for
> The experience of a lot of designers is that they get run right
> engineering on a regular basis, and because of that end up with
> they're very unhappy with. When engineers propose a shiny new
> that seems to exclude them yet again, and doesn't have room for the
> accommodations that they've wedged into the waterfall-ish
> then it's no wonder that they'd see it as a threat.
> If we'd like UX designers not to see us as a threat, I don't think
> telling them that they're the real problem is particularly
> I'd rather focus on altering either the methods or our presentation
> them so that they don't feel threatened.
argh - I confess I get really upset when people post responses
without paying attention to the words they're responding to.
I repeat the words just above: "> > If UX designers decide that
BECAUSE it was suggested by programmers that it's bad for them,
then the UX designers are the biggest threat themselves. "
That is an "if" statement, the conditional part of which conditions
on the key word "because", all of which you ignored in your post.
You write: "> I'm a programmer, and I agree that's at least a big
What's a big risk - that agile was "proposed by programmers"?
That's not a risk, that's a historical event.
What's the big risk - that UX designers will "decide that
BECAUSE it was suggested by programmers that it's bad for them"?
That risk can't be placed at placed at the feet of the programmers.
Is the big risk that "designers get run right over by engineering
on a regular basis"? That's a risk, but is addressed both in
Jacob's article and my response, and is not connected to the
extract you quoted.
....let me see, breathe deep.... exhale.... go for a long walk...